Filed 1/15/20 P. v. Compher CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

GREG FREEMAN COMPHER,

Defendant and Appellant.

D076400

(Super. Ct. No. SCD277852)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Timothy R. Walsh, Judge. Affirmed.

Matthew Aaron Lopas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Greg Freeman Compher pleaded guilty to one count of grand theft in an amount in excess of $950 (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a)). The remaining charges were dismissed. Compher was granted probation, given credit for time served and ordered to pay various fines, fees and assessments. Probation was thereafter revoked and reinstated. Ultimately probation was again revoked and Compher was sentenced to prison for a determinate term of two years to be served concurrently with the sentences in two other unrelated cases.

Compher filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating he has not been able to identify any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered Compher the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, however Compher has notified the court he will not file a supplemental brief.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Compher and another person were involved in stealing a bicycle worth approximately $1,500. Area surveillance video showed a person bring the bike to Compher’s location and showed Compher riding away on it.

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks this court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review of the record, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) counsel has identified three possible issues counsel considered in assessing the potential merit of this appeal:

1. Whether Compher’s original guilty plea was valid;

2. Whether the court erred in imposing fines, fees and assessments without first holding a hearing on Compher’s ability to pay; and

3. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the fines, fees and assessments imposed by the court.

We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. We have not identified any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent counsel has represented Compher on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, J.

WE CONCUR:

McCONNELL, P. J.

BENKE, J.